Pretty worthless "review." No impressions of AF? How it will AF with existing lenses that were designed for PDAF is probably the biggest question mark. And saying the images look great on the LCD is meaningless. Unless, of course, you never actually display images any larger than that. If that's typical of A.P., it's not worth the electrons it takes to send it across the web.

One thing I did notice, though, is that it appears "design" has been allowed to compromise function. I was very surprise to see that there's no thumb rest on the back at all. A couple of decades of experience on what works has just been tossed out the door.

The K-01 natively fits, meters, and auto-focuses tons of great Pentax glass, all using a Sony BSI sensor with gobs of dynamic range and clean ISO 6400, the body costing a mere $700 (or less, depending on your source).

If I didn't have a K-5, I'd get a K-01.

The price/performance ratio of the K-01 is astounding, and it makes it hard to recommend, for example, a GH2 or EM5 to a new user who isn't committed to a particular system.

The K-01 natively fits, meters, and auto-focuses tons of great Pentax glass, all using a Sony BSI sensor with gobs of dynamic range and clean ISO 6400, the body costing a mere $700 (or less, depending on your source).
If I didn't have a K-5, I'd get a K-01.
The price/performance ratio of the K-01 is astounding, and it makes it hard to recommend, for example, a GH2 or EM5 to a new user who isn't committed to a particular system.
Additionally, as alluded-to earlier, Pentax makes some great lenses.

Click to expand...

Thanks for an interesting perspective. However, I think it would be best to wait until people can actually handle production K-01 bodies and test them thoroughly before jumping to any conclusions.

I am particularly pessimistic about the AF performance and would need a lot of reassurance that lenses designed for phase detect AF will focus quickly with a contrast detect AF system. For an example, look no further than the slow AF performance of Olympus 4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies.

You are quite obviously a Pentax fan. I used to be, but gave up with Pentax when the full frame digital body failed to appear. Since then, the Pentax lens range has suffered badly at the hands of former owners Hoya. It would take some very good new lenses, or the reintroduction of some old favourites, to get me to consider buying Pentax ever again.

The K-01 natively fits, meters, and auto-focuses tons of great Pentax glass, all using a Sony BSI sensor with gobs of dynamic range and clean ISO 6400, the body costing a mere $700 (or less, depending on your source).

If I didn't have a K-5, I'd get a K-01.

The price/performance ratio of the K-01 is astounding, and it makes it hard to recommend, for example, a GH2 or EM5 to a new user who isn't committed to a particular system.

Additionally, as alluded-to earlier, Pentax makes some great lenses.

Click to expand...

The K-01 is still significantly larger than m43 bodies and glass - so probably many folks who don't want a bigger camera would be willing to pay an E-M5 premium. Others who don't want the bigger camera might still go a PEN or Panasonic for less $$.

For the "bigger camera" crowd, I'd think Fuji and even Leica should be a bit worried about this camera. Folks wanting a full-frame CLO ("camera-looking-object") would see the Pentax as an exceptional value. If it has sharper images than Fuji (images have appeared pretty soft from the X1), then they probably will grab much of that market.

I am particularly pessimistic about the AF performance and would need a lot of reassurance that lenses designed for phase detect AF will focus quickly with a contrast detect AF system. For an example, look no further than the slow AF performance of Olympus 4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies.

You are quite obviously a Pentax fan. I used to be, but gave up with Pentax when the full frame digital body failed to appear. Since then, the Pentax lens range has suffered badly at the hands of former owners Hoya. It would take some very good new lenses, or the reintroduction of some old favourites, to get me to consider buying Pentax ever again.

Click to expand...

Well to start with the K-5 already does CDAF faster than the first series of Pen cameras (e-p1/2)...not that that is saying particularly much, just saying that if the K-5 wasn't bad, then a camera designed with only PDAF should definitely be better.

Curious what particular lenses Pentax would need to resurrect for you to consider buying? It is equally obvious that you are have a particular hatred for the brand. I wouldn't go so far as to say the K-01 is in any way better than m4/3 cameras, but I definitely wouldn't call it any worse either...just different.

On the AF, I've handled the prototype on v0.33 firmware. Its at least as fast as GF1 on various lenses (40mm XS; 15mm; 100mm macro). So firmware v1.00 may (or not) be better.
Considering that its even GF1 like AF speed for old screw drive lenses is already quite a feat. (no one else has that sort of speed for AF legacy lens compatibility).

Its pretty well sized for APS-C cameras. Especially so once one holds it with the Pentax primes which are typically smaller than other brand APS-C lenses.

Looks wise, I have mixed feelings. At times it looks plain uninspired and boxy. Other times, it looks 'right', modern 'art decor'
I think that's what Pentax aimed for in its design and perhaps target audience.
Certainly polarizing by all accounts I've read so far.
Don't like the 'chimney' in the front though.

Handling is comfortable with the buttons in the right places and generally good access to the most often used modes/functions.
I have small hands and its thickness and lack of grip makes me feel like I'm holding a box. On older film cameras which don't have a grip too, its thinner, so I don't get that same 'holding a thick box' feeling.

My own lingering question even after handling one is that as a system, will it be small enough and be negligible/tolerable encumbrance to justify the performance/IQ advantage?
I can't tell for now, as that takes at least using it for a full day.
I don't have a problem using my K5 for days, so I suspect the answer is a yes. But G3 with 3 lenses is even more comfortable and is no slouch in IQ for most stuff.

It will certainly work well as a cheaper spare/2nd-cam to my K5 though.

Edit (7Mar2012) : I think I found the answer regarding how easy it is to carry the system around for a day of shooting.
It feels lighter than my K5 and certainly feels comfortable and not weighty with small primes when slung over the shoulder or neck.
Feels pretty balanced too.
Of course its not smaller/lighter than a G3, but in the world of APS-C, its pretty good.

Links in this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.

This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.